On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 04:33:39AM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: >On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 02:22:33AM +0000, Wei Yang wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 12:35:29PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: >> >On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 08:22:34PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: >> >> The patch titled >> >> Subject: lib/interval_tree: skip the check before go to the right subtree >> >> has been added to the -mm mm-nonmm-unstable branch. Its filename is >> >> lib-interval_tree-skip-the-check-before-go-to-the-right-subtree.patch >> > >> >I don't think this patch should be added. There's no claim of any >> >performance win. Wei has a long history of tweaky little patches that >> >may or may not be buggy. The interval tree has been around a long time >> >and doesn't have a test suite. This feels like unnecessary risk. >> >> Your concern is understandable. A change in fundamental data structure should >> be very careful. But I thought we don't take things personal. > >This isn't personal. It's noting your history. > >If you want to add a test suite for the interval tree to the kernel, >that would be a useful set of patches. And it would remove my concern >if we can demonstrate that we've exercised the code paths that you're >modifying and everything is fine. Sure, if my understanding is correct, the test suite is supposed to be put tools/testing/, right? -- Wei Yang Help you, Help me
